SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Dermot Burke who wrote (9820)7/31/1998 1:25:00 AM
From: dumbmoney  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74651
 
Bork's assertion that "But for Microsoft's interference, the market would be much more dynamic as new technologies and fresh innovations challenged the company's present dominance" is an absurd conjecture which cannot be proven, or for that matter disproven. It's typical of the whole paper - all rhetoric and no substance.

Bork says "The only changes that may not be made are those that both impair the opportunities of rivals and do not further competition on the merits, i.e., lack a legitimate efficiency justification." This much is true. If Microsoft can show there is a consumer benefit to integrating the browser and the OS (and obviously, there is), then there is no anti-trust problem with Microsoft offering such a combination for sale. The worst case scenario is that Microsoft will be forced to offer a crippled version of Windows, possibly for a lower price, that lacks the broswer and related functions. Nobody would buy such a version, so even in the worst case Microsoft suffers no real damage.



To: Dermot Burke who wrote (9820)7/31/1998 5:51:00 AM
From: Frank Ellis Morris  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74651
 
It is plain to see that you are not a Microsoft Shareholder. Netscape was quite arrogant in assuming that it was going to bury Microsoft and when it could not, it hired the Justice Department to do its dirty work for them.
I do not see any merit in Bourke's paper and assert that the motion is with prejudice and without foundation. I guess that both you and Bourke are Netscape shareholders.

Frank